Welcome to the YorkieTalk.com Forums Community - the community for Yorkshire Terriers.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. You will be able to chat with over 35,000 YorkieTalk members, read over 2,000,000 posted discussions, and view more than 15,000 Yorkie photos in the YorkieTalk Photo Gallery after you register. We would love to have you as a member!

I just read a small article in Modern dog magazine that said neutered males are living 18% longer then non neutered males and spayed females are living 24% longer then non spayed females. Just thought I would share.

That is awesome :-) I am just getting ready to schedule Gizmos neutering tomorrow, as he will be six months on the 6th. He also has all of his baby milk teeth that never fell out, I think because he was so malnourished when I rescued him. He actually has 2 full rows of teeth between his canines on both top and bottom :-(

That is awesome :-) I am just getting ready to schedule Gizmos neutering tomorrow, as he will be six months on the 6th. He also has all of his baby milk teeth that never fell out, I think because he was so malnourished when I rescued him. He actually has 2 full rows of teeth between his canines on both top and bottom :-(

Please ask your vet to check that his growth plates have closed before you neuter. One of the long time great breeders that use to post here highly recommends checking for this prior to having any pup fixed.

She wants to breed him with her daughters Yorkie. However, neither of them know the first thing about breeding or the work that goes into it. I don't know anything about breeding except for what I have read on YT but I have no desire to breed.

Sorry but not so fast. Please post the article. And yes the statistics at first glance make it seem like it's a no brainer. But there are a lot of other factors to consider. It's really not so cut and dried:

Snipped from here: Benefits and Risks of Neutering, An Evidence Update: Effects of Neutering on Longevity and Cause of Death in Dogs | The SkeptVet Blog"Several specific infectious diseases occurred with sufficient frequency to be analyzed individually. Sterilized dogs were at lower risk of death due to four of these five disease. However, these results are a bit more problematic than those concerning cancer risk. Unlike most cancers, the parasitic and infectious diseases listed are almost all completely preventable with proper vaccination or other preventative veterinary care.This raises the question of whether differences between sterilized and intact animals in these causes of death may be confounded by differences in the level of care they receive, in the socioeconomic status of their owners, in the time and place in which they lived, and many other variables not specifically addressed in this study.It is interesting that the same patterns in differences between cause of death in neutered and intact dogs were seen across many different breeds, each with their own specific risk pattern for particular diseases. Cancer, for example, appeared to be a more common cause of death in neutered compared to intact animals even in breeds with relatively low rates of cancer. This strengthens the idea that neutering is directly associated with the risk of such disease and also emphasizes the importance of considering the absolute, rather than relative risk, and the overall risk picture in any individual patient.

In a nutshell - Spayed and Neutered pets are more likely to die from cancer and have many more serious ailments. Intact animals die more from trauma and infection.

Now what are the reasons for this? Could be more dogs that are not fixed are out running free. That doesn't mean if you have a dog inside and cloistered it will be likely to have the same level of risks.

The study isn't definitive. The cases taken from a teaching hospital so not representative of the overall population.

UC Davis is well regarded. It's not as cut and dried as a one line statistic.

Also WHEN you spay and neuter is starting to change. Educate yourself for your sake and your dogs, then make a decision.

If someone tells me my dog is more likely to die of cancer, if I neuter; or die from an infection that I can immunize against, if I don't, I might consider the latter. Just wanting to offer more information for thought.

There may be valid reasons for spaying or neutering your dog but for the most part they are not supported by facts. What the issue amounts to in the end is it is a convenience for pet owners. Animals live longer if they are spayed or neutered? I seriously doubt it. It helps prevent cancer? Cancer is like every other fatal disease. If you live long enough you get something that kills you. Your male humps your leg? What the hell? You're the master or mistress. Just don't stand there and let him do it.
My Yorkie, Raider, humps his fuzzy toys once in awhile but I don't have a problem with that.
Now with those issues out of the way here's what I do know about castration, as we used to call it on the farm. By the way the female farm animals were never spayed as it was too costly to perform on female farm animals and besides they produced offspring, which we sold. Male farm animals were castrated, which by the way was done on the farm without anesthesia, which is inhumane but such is life on the farm and part of the production of meat. It was done for two reasons. 1. The animals gained more weight at a faster rate and 2. The meat was tender after they were slaughtered. What this translates to in your pet dog is spayed and neutered dogs tend to gain weight and they lose muscle tone. Since I don't want to have to monitor what Raider eats so he doesn't get fat I'm leaving him intact. If he gets cancer at 12 years of age or whatever and dies then it's not a big deal. In the end dogs are much like humans. They die at all different ages from all sorts of different reasons and in the end it doesn't matter much whether they die intact or not.
In closing I want to touch on two issues here. The first one is if I thought neutering was such a good deal and helped you live longer and prevented cancer hell, I'd probably line up and have it done for myself. But I really don't think that's true at all.
The last thought is a lot of people aren't rational at all on this subject. In fact I've run into a couple of downright nasty people when I've mentioned that I'm not neutering my dog. That's the big reason I'm not going to discuss the subject with anyone except the people on this forum.

I just read a small article in Modern dog magazine that said neutered males are living 18% longer then non neutered males and spayed females are living 24% longer then non spayed females. Just thought I would share.

In my opinion as a nurse, I would think that actually - the opposite would be true. The reason for this is bc hormones play an UNBELIEVABLY important part in the way our bodies function -- and we are essentially robbing our animals of important hormones. Stats taken out of context rarely are as good as they appear.

Remember, the real reason there is such a push for spaying/neutering is not really for the health of the animal, but more bc of over population. If health of the animal were paramount, we wouldn't see S/N as often as we do. And yes, while spaying female dogs can help avoid certain cancers, it's still not the real reason to spay -- unless you also believe that we human females should spay ourselves in order to avoid cancers...!!!??? It's the same concept.

Quote:

Originally Posted by impish

Sorry but not so fast. Please post the article. And yes the statistics at first glance make it seem like it's a no brainer. But there are a lot of other factors to consider. It's really not so cut and dried:

Snipped from here: Benefits and Risks of Neutering, An Evidence Update: Effects of Neutering on Longevity and Cause of Death in Dogs | The SkeptVet Blog"Several specific infectious diseases occurred with sufficient frequency to be analyzed individually. Sterilized dogs were at lower risk of death due to four of these five disease. However, these results are a bit more problematic than those concerning cancer risk. Unlike most cancers, the parasitic and infectious diseases listed are almost all completely preventable with proper vaccination or other preventative veterinary care.This raises the question of whether differences between sterilized and intact animals in these causes of death may be confounded by differences in the level of care they receive, in the socioeconomic status of their owners, in the time and place in which they lived, and many other variables not specifically addressed in this study.It is interesting that the same patterns in differences between cause of death in neutered and intact dogs were seen across many different breeds, each with their own specific risk pattern for particular diseases. Cancer, for example, appeared to be a more common cause of death in neutered compared to intact animals even in breeds with relatively low rates of cancer. This strengthens the idea that neutering is directly associated with the risk of such disease and also emphasizes the importance of considering the absolute, rather than relative risk, and the overall risk picture in any individual patient.

In a nutshell - Spayed and Neutered pets are more likely to die from cancer and have many more serious ailments. Intact animals die more from trauma and infection.

Now what are the reasons for this? Could be more dogs that are not fixed are out running free. That doesn't mean if you have a dog inside and cloistered it will be likely to have the same level of risks.

The study isn't definitive. The cases taken from a teaching hospital so not representative of the overall population.

UC Davis is well regarded. It's not as cut and dried as a one line statistic.

Also WHEN you spay and neuter is starting to change. Educate yourself for your sake and your dogs, then make a decision.

If someone tells me my dog is more likely to die of cancer, if I neuter; or die from an infection that I can immunize against, if I don't, I might consider the latter. Just wanting to offer more information for thought.

There may be valid reasons for spaying or neutering your dog but for the most part they are not supported by facts. What the issue amounts to in the end is it is a convenience for pet owners.

Since I don't want to have to monitor what Raider eats so he doesn't get fat I'm leaving him intact.

Convenient isn't it to not have to monitor his food.

I'm just teasing you. I'll admit to having Kaji neutered because it's convenient for me to not have him run off to chase a bitch in heat, what with living in a big city and all. Where I work, I almost run over 5 dogs on my way in, and at least another 5 dogs on my way out of the office due to careless dog owners who let their intact animals roam the streets. If I lived on a farm like you and Raider do, who knows, I might not have had him neutered either. It sure would make not having to monitor his weight due to his LP a whole lot easier for me.

Sorry but not so fast. Please post the article. And yes the statistics at first glance make it seem like it's a no brainer. But there are a lot of other factors to consider. It's really not so cut and dried:

Snipped from here: Benefits and Risks of Neutering, An Evidence Update: Effects of Neutering on Longevity and Cause of Death in Dogs | The SkeptVet Blog"Several specific infectious diseases occurred with sufficient frequency to be analyzed individually. Sterilized dogs were at lower risk of death due to four of these five disease. However, these results are a bit more problematic than those concerning cancer risk. Unlike most cancers, the parasitic and infectious diseases listed are almost all completely preventable with proper vaccination or other preventative veterinary care.This raises the question of whether differences between sterilized and intact animals in these causes of death may be confounded by differences in the level of care they receive, in the socioeconomic status of their owners, in the time and place in which they lived, and many other variables not specifically addressed in this study.It is interesting that the same patterns in differences between cause of death in neutered and intact dogs were seen across many different breeds, each with their own specific risk pattern for particular diseases. Cancer, for example, appeared to be a more common cause of death in neutered compared to intact animals even in breeds with relatively low rates of cancer. This strengthens the idea that neutering is directly associated with the risk of such disease and also emphasizes the importance of considering the absolute, rather than relative risk, and the overall risk picture in any individual patient.

In a nutshell - Spayed and Neutered pets are more likely to die from cancer and have many more serious ailments. Intact animals die more from trauma and infection.

Now what are the reasons for this? Could be more dogs that are not fixed are out running free. That doesn't mean if you have a dog inside and cloistered it will be likely to have the same level of risks.

The study isn't definitive. The cases taken from a teaching hospital so not representative of the overall population.

UC Davis is well regarded. It's not as cut and dried as a one line statistic.

Also WHEN you spay and neuter is starting to change. Educate yourself for your sake and your dogs, then make a decision.

If someone tells me my dog is more likely to die of cancer, if I neuter; or die from an infection that I can immunize against, if I don't, I might consider the latter. Just wanting to offer more information for thought.

There are infections that females can get that you can not immunize against as well as the fact that immunization is not 100%. It also seems most of these articles focus on neutering more then spaying. I feel the research shows that spaying and neutering is much better then the research showing the contrary. I also feel for the poor dogs who don't get fixed and have "accidents" happen and have to live through a pregnancy and or die and lose there pups for lack of concern and knowledge from the human. At least half of the dogs that end up in shelters are because of these "accidents" which is causing millions to be killed yearly. The article was from an actual modern dog magazine so I can not post a link because it did not come from online. But it said the study came from Banifield which they also go one to say is the largest vet practice in the US. I highly doubt they would just make up these numbers.

There may be valid reasons for spaying or neutering your dog but for the most part they are not supported by facts. What the issue amounts to in the end is it is a convenience for pet owners. Animals live longer if they are spayed or neutered? I seriously doubt it. It helps prevent cancer? Cancer is like every other fatal disease. If you live long enough you get something that kills you. Your male humps your leg? What the hell? You're the master or mistress. Just don't stand there and let him do it.
My Yorkie, Raider, humps his fuzzy toys once in awhile but I don't have a problem with that.
Now with those issues out of the way here's what I do know about castration, as we used to call it on the farm. By the way the female farm animals were never spayed as it was too costly to perform on female farm animals and besides they produced offspring, which we sold. Male farm animals were castrated, which by the way was done on the farm without anesthesia, which is inhumane but such is life on the farm and part of the production of meat. It was done for two reasons. 1. The animals gained more weight at a faster rate and 2. The meat was tender after they were slaughtered. What this translates to in your pet dog is spayed and neutered dogs tend to gain weight and they lose muscle tone. Since I don't want to have to monitor what Raider eats so he doesn't get fat I'm leaving him intact. If he gets cancer at 12 years of age or whatever and dies then it's not a big deal. In the end dogs are much like humans. They die at all different ages from all sorts of different reasons and in the end it doesn't matter much whether they die intact or not.
In closing I want to touch on two issues here. The first one is if I thought neutering was such a good deal and helped you live longer and prevented cancer hell, I'd probably line up and have it done for myself. But I really don't think that's true at all.
The last thought is a lot of people aren't rational at all on this subject. In fact I've run into a couple of downright nasty people when I've mentioned that I'm not neutering my dog. That's the big reason I'm not going to discuss the subject with anyone except the people on this forum.

There are facts..... And it is a big false statement to say dogs gain weight after being fixed is has been proven a myth. My dog was spayed at 9 months and she has more muscle then me!

In my opinion as a nurse, I would think that actually - the opposite would be true. The reason for this is bc hormones play an UNBELIEVABLY important part in the way our bodies function -- and we are essentially robbing our animals of important hormones. Stats taken out of context rarely are as good as they appear.

Remember, the real reason there is such a push for spaying/neutering is not really for the health of the animal, but more bc of over population. If health of the animal were paramount, we wouldn't see S/N as often as we do. And yes, while spaying female dogs can help avoid certain cancers, it's still not the real reason to spay -- unless you also believe that we human females should spay ourselves in order to avoid cancers...!!!??? It's the same concept.

Thanks for digging into this. Now the stats make much more sense.

Its not just cancers females can have there uterus fill with puss and blood and if not noticed and taken care of it can kill your dog. I am saddened that you think I have taken stats out of context and I encourage you to pick up a modern dog and see I have not done that..... Honestly maybe after a female is done having kids she should have her uterus removed it would have saved my Grandmother and my aunt who is looking at battling the same cancer.